4.4 Article

Validity of the school setting interview for students with special educational needs in regular high school - a Rasch analysis

期刊

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12955-017-0830-6

关键词

Psychometrics; Neuropsychiatric disorder; Dyslexia; Assessment; Instrument development; Person-environment fit; Participation; Support in school; Occupational therapy

资金

  1. Swedish Institute of Assistive Technology (SIAT)
  2. Linkoping University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Participation in education is a vital component of adolescents' everyday life and a determinant of health and future opportunities in adult life. The School Setting Interview (SSI) is an instrument which assesses student-environment fit and reflects the potential needs for adjustments to enhance students' participation in school activities. The aim of the study was to investigate the psychometric properties of the SSI for students with special educational needs in regular high school. Methods: A sample of 509 students with special educational needs was assessed with the SSI. The polytomous unrestricted Rasch model was used to analyze the psychometric properties of the SSI regarding targeting, model fit, differential item functioning (DIF), response category functioning and unidimensionality. Results: The SSI generally confirmed fit to assumptions of the Rasch model. Reliability was acceptable (0.73) and the SSI scale was able to separate students into three different levels of student-environment fit. DIF among gender was detected in item Remember things and in item Homework DIF was detected among students with or without diagnosis. All items had disordered thresholds. The SSI demonstrated unidimensionality and no response dependence was present among items. Conclusion: The results suggest that the SSI is valid for use among students with special educational needs in order to provide and evaluate environmental adjustments. However, the items with the detected DIF and the SSI rating scale with its disordered thresholds needs to be further scrutinized.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据